Religion V's Science
- Thread starter -Daniel-
- Start date
I just cannot figure it out. Why is it so difficult to grasp one single point that clarified the whole matter. The Qur'an can only be interpretated with the Sunnah. You cannot change the meanin' of a specific word accordin' to your own desire.
Not exactly.
No, I don't. Perhaps you elobrate it.
It does matter. You CAP from a source which you've no knowledge of. In other words, you tried to Google a source that suits your way without verifyin' if the source comes from a reputable one.
Edip Yuksel rejects the Sunnah and thus tries to interpretate the Quran accordin' to his own desires. He follows an pseudo-Islamic cult named 'Submission'. And there is no "two versions of the Qur'an".
Laughable! just laughable. Minardi wrote: "the original word for atmosphere -- not the arabic one but the english one".
Minardi, why do you dispute about a subject which you've no knowledge of. Since the term sama means Heaven in Arabic, let's read what the dictionary states.
Heaven:
And why do you've to use to profanity in your words?
It did not toke 7 days. Stop imposin' your Christian-centered notions on the Islamic belief. Allah SWT did not create the earth in 7 days but two days. He created the Heavens and earth in 6 days. Allah SWT said that time is relative (refer to Einstein's theories). Allah SWT created the Heavens and earth in 6 epochs but we experienced 13.5 billion.
6 epochs = 13.5 which makes it each epoch 2.25 billion years. Now Allah (God) said he created the Earth in 2 days.
2.25x2 = 4.5 billion. Voila, the earth is 4.5 billion old which is correct.
Offcourse he is an anti-Muslim. That guy is a joke and continously slanders the Muslim community with his fanatical ideas. He rejects the Prophet (P) and follows his cult leader Rashid Khalifa.
Fundamentalists? Is there a difference between a Muslim and a fundamentalist Muslim? I'm an fundamentalist Muslim. I follow and, and practise the fundamentals of Islam.
Furthermore, these fundamentalist "Muslims", since when did they mis-interpretate the meanin' of the verses in the Qur'an? Islam phrohibits takin' innocenent civilians as hostages and yet it does happen. How does that lead to the Qur'an bein' mis-interpretated. Unless, you want to talk about takin' verses out of context which is not exclusive to the Qur'an only but also practically appliesto any other book. And just a quick note, I'm not here to discuss the current state of the Ummah but I'm here to discuss your allegations on the Qur'an.
Not exactly.
No, I don't. Perhaps you elobrate it.
It does matter. You CAP from a source which you've no knowledge of. In other words, you tried to Google a source that suits your way without verifyin' if the source comes from a reputable one.
Edip Yuksel rejects the Sunnah and thus tries to interpretate the Quran accordin' to his own desires. He follows an pseudo-Islamic cult named 'Submission'. And there is no "two versions of the Qur'an".
Laughable! just laughable. Minardi wrote: "the original word for atmosphere -- not the arabic one but the english one".
Minardi, why do you dispute about a subject which you've no knowledge of. Since the term sama means Heaven in Arabic, let's read what the dictionary states.
Heaven:
And why do you've to use to profanity in your words?
It did not toke 7 days. Stop imposin' your Christian-centered notions on the Islamic belief. Allah SWT did not create the earth in 7 days but two days. He created the Heavens and earth in 6 days. Allah SWT said that time is relative (refer to Einstein's theories). Allah SWT created the Heavens and earth in 6 epochs but we experienced 13.5 billion.
6 epochs = 13.5 which makes it each epoch 2.25 billion years. Now Allah (God) said he created the Earth in 2 days.
2.25x2 = 4.5 billion. Voila, the earth is 4.5 billion old which is correct.
Offcourse he is an anti-Muslim. That guy is a joke and continously slanders the Muslim community with his fanatical ideas. He rejects the Prophet (P) and follows his cult leader Rashid Khalifa.
Fundamentalists? Is there a difference between a Muslim and a fundamentalist Muslim? I'm an fundamentalist Muslim. I follow and, and practise the fundamentals of Islam.
Furthermore, these fundamentalist "Muslims", since when did they mis-interpretate the meanin' of the verses in the Qur'an? Islam phrohibits takin' innocenent civilians as hostages and yet it does happen. How does that lead to the Qur'an bein' mis-interpretated. Unless, you want to talk about takin' verses out of context which is not exclusive to the Qur'an only but also practically appliesto any other book. And just a quick note, I'm not here to discuss the current state of the Ummah but I'm here to discuss your allegations on the Qur'an.
Found the quote on what I was talking about before...
"Galileo was an Illuminatus. And he was also a devout Catholic. He tried to soften the church's position on science by proclaiming that science did not undermine the existence of God, but rather reinforced it. [...] He held that science and religion were not enemies, but rather allies - two different languages telling the same story, a story of symmetry and balance... heaven and hell, night and day, hot and cold, God and Satan. Both science and religion rejoiced in God's symmetry... the endless contest of light and dark." Angels and Demons Chapter 9, p.51
"Galileo was an Illuminatus. And he was also a devout Catholic. He tried to soften the church's position on science by proclaiming that science did not undermine the existence of God, but rather reinforced it. [...] He held that science and religion were not enemies, but rather allies - two different languages telling the same story, a story of symmetry and balance... heaven and hell, night and day, hot and cold, God and Satan. Both science and religion rejoiced in God's symmetry... the endless contest of light and dark." Angels and Demons Chapter 9, p.51
Religion
Fuck science, they can't proof shit especially when it comes to things that happened according to stories from either the Bible or the Quran. 2 examples:
Example #1
I once had a geography teacher who said that scientists had a fucking explanation for Moses splitting the Red Sea. This is what he said: Exactly when Moses splitted the Red Sea there was an earthquake in the water around an island from GREECH and because of the power of that quake the sea splitted all the way from GREECH to EGYPT <--- Crap, bullshit, nonsense
Example #2
Another geography teacher had an explanation for the plagues in Egypt which happened when the Egyptians didn't want to release the Israelians (God's people). This is what he said: The bloody rain wasn't blood but just very red sand that fell from the sky because of sand storms etc etc. He said a lot more but i'm tired so i'll save the rest. My point is that this is bullshit 2, because even if it wasn't blood why couldn't it be an act of God. God created the earth so he can use nature for whatever the purpose is, so i think science is nothing compared to religion period.
Fuck science, they can't proof shit especially when it comes to things that happened according to stories from either the Bible or the Quran. 2 examples:
Example #1
I once had a geography teacher who said that scientists had a fucking explanation for Moses splitting the Red Sea. This is what he said: Exactly when Moses splitted the Red Sea there was an earthquake in the water around an island from GREECH and because of the power of that quake the sea splitted all the way from GREECH to EGYPT <--- Crap, bullshit, nonsense
Example #2
Another geography teacher had an explanation for the plagues in Egypt which happened when the Egyptians didn't want to release the Israelians (God's people). This is what he said: The bloody rain wasn't blood but just very red sand that fell from the sky because of sand storms etc etc. He said a lot more but i'm tired so i'll save the rest. My point is that this is bullshit 2, because even if it wasn't blood why couldn't it be an act of God. God created the earth so he can use nature for whatever the purpose is, so i think science is nothing compared to religion period.
^^ Nut, I read that a lot of the events in the bible may not be intended to taken literally, the expressions are merely metaphors that were part of language and method of expression at the time when it was written - as in "parting the Red Sea" may not literally mean, the sea was parted, but instead, relates to a "humanly possible" occurance that was merely expressed in the poetic fashion of the time.
As for your second example, I've heard stuff like that too. I had an exercise in philosophy where I had to use scientific arguments in support of the theory that the blood from the sky was red dust from an asteroid or something like that. Yet "blood" from the sky could be another example of the metaphorical expressions, in this case used to describe situations which because of the lack of scientific knowledge, were given the only plausible explanation that they could.
As for your second example, I've heard stuff like that too. I had an exercise in philosophy where I had to use scientific arguments in support of the theory that the blood from the sky was red dust from an asteroid or something like that. Yet "blood" from the sky could be another example of the metaphorical expressions, in this case used to describe situations which because of the lack of scientific knowledge, were given the only plausible explanation that they could.
That is incorrect unless you prove your assertion with an reference.
The Biblic version states that he drowned while pursuing Prophet Musa (Moses) (P) and thus his body could not be preserved.
Many scientists such as Dr. Bucaille were selected to treat the mummy of Merneptah (Pharoah in Moses' time) and concluded that he was drowned and yet his body was preserved perfectly.
Bucaille in of his books writes:
"and the results of the medical investigations came to support the previous assumption, as in the year 1975 a lameness extraction from a small muscular tissue occurred in Cairo, with the valuable help that professor Michfl Durigon offered. And the accurate microscopical examination showed the perfect preserved status for the smallest dissectional muscular parts, and it points that such a perfect preservation couldn't be possible if the body remained in water for a while, even if it stayed outside the water for a long time before it submit for the preparatory operations of the mummification. And we have done more than this while we were interested in searching for the possible reasons of the pharaoh's death."
As stated in the Glorious Qur'an:
We save thee in the body, that thou mayest be a sign to those who come after thee! but verily, many among mankind are heedless of Our Signs!
The Biblic version states that he drowned while pursuing Prophet Musa (Moses) (P) and thus his body could not be preserved.
Many scientists such as Dr. Bucaille were selected to treat the mummy of Merneptah (Pharoah in Moses' time) and concluded that he was drowned and yet his body was preserved perfectly.
Bucaille in of his books writes:
"and the results of the medical investigations came to support the previous assumption, as in the year 1975 a lameness extraction from a small muscular tissue occurred in Cairo, with the valuable help that professor Michfl Durigon offered. And the accurate microscopical examination showed the perfect preserved status for the smallest dissectional muscular parts, and it points that such a perfect preservation couldn't be possible if the body remained in water for a while, even if it stayed outside the water for a long time before it submit for the preparatory operations of the mummification. And we have done more than this while we were interested in searching for the possible reasons of the pharaoh's death."
As stated in the Glorious Qur'an:
We save thee in the body, that thou mayest be a sign to those who come after thee! but verily, many among mankind are heedless of Our Signs!
Dr. Bucaille's book is very biased and some stuff is just plain wrong. Bucaille said that the Pharoah's skin had salt on it, another proof that he drowned in the sea. But the mummification process includes salt! Any mummified body is preserved almost perfectly, all the damaged mummys were damaged by grave robbers, if Merneptah's mummy was in his Royal Tomb it would've been looted too.
Also the book was written in the 70s when there was a different egyptian timeline. Here is a link to the newest timeline of egypt http://debate.org.uk/topics/history/rohl-1.htm
Therefore in the new chronology the mummy that Dr. Bucaille tested would not be the pharoah that drowned in the Red Sea.
Also the book was written in the 70s when there was a different egyptian timeline. Here is a link to the newest timeline of egypt http://debate.org.uk/topics/history/rohl-1.htm
Therefore in the new chronology the mummy that Dr. Bucaille tested would not be the pharoah that drowned in the Red Sea.
Haha, are we googlin' for unverifid sources?
Let me firstly state that debate.org.uk is a biased Christian apologetic website that _attempts_ to discredit Islam by publishin' articles with pretty lop-sided, one-dimensional and biased interpretations to various Quranic verses. It fabricated accounts and published fictional books and regards them as factual.
Not only did you post an Christian apologetic website, while your primary purpose was to refute the Biblical account of the Pharoah
, but you also posted an synopsis of a fictional book.The evangelical Christians at Christian-answers.net produced a article entitled ' Pharaohs and Kings Confused' at
http://www.christiananswers.net/abr/scoop.html#Pharaohs
They reviewed Rohl's revision and couldn't conclude it should be taken seriously. Furthermore, Kenneth Kitchen pointed out that this "new chronology" creates more problems than it "solves".
Dr. M S M Saifullah writes:
There were parallel civilizations running with the Egyptian civilization and they were engaged in trade, battles etc. So, if one shifts the Egyptian chronology then it should fit with the chronologies of parallel civlizations. But unfortunately for Rohl much of his work would like to be proven as fictional
Furthermore, Bucaille was not a Muslim when he conducted that research and thus your ludicrous claim that he was biased falls flat on its face
Donate
Any donations will be used to help pay for the site costs, and anything donated above will be donated to C-Dub's son on behalf of this community.
Members online
No members online now.